DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 000953492-0018

Invalidity · first instance · 2019-08-14

000102500

Contested design: 000953492-0018

CDR

Outcome

Invalidated (total)

The application for a declaration of invalidity is granted, the contested Community design is declared invalid, and the holder must bear the applicant's costs fixed at EUR 750.

Show verbatim operative text(de)

Dem Antrag auf Nichtigerklärung wird stattgegeben. Das eingetragene Gemeinschaftsgeschmacksmuster Nr. 000953492-0018 wird für nichtig erklärt. Die Inhaberin trägt die Kosten der Antragstellerin, die auf 750 EUR festgesetzt werden.

CostsHolder ordered to pay costs of €750

Parties

Applicant · invalidity challenger

NBL Europe GmbH

Germany (DE)

Monzastr. 4a, 63225 Langen, Deutschland

Holder · RCD owner

Erwin Müller GmbH

Germany (DE)

Breslauer Str. 34-38, 49808 Lingen (Ems), Deutschland

Prior art cited (2)

Catalog

Badaccessoire-Serie including the asserted toilet paper holder shown at trade fairs and in product catalogs

Artikelnr. 11341A · trade fairs and product catalogs

National design

Chinese design for a wall-mounted toilet paper holder

CN 300791455 D / ZL 200730117714.1 · Chinese design registration publication · disclosed 2008-06-11

Legal grounds invoked

Article 25(1)(b)Article 4Article 6(1)Article 7

Argument summary

  • The applicant sought invalidity for lack of novelty and at least lack of individual character, relying on its own earlier bathroom accessory disclosures and a Chinese design published before the filing date.
  • The holder argued the request should be rejected because the evidence did not prove prior disclosure of conflicting earlier designs and also pointed to differences in surface finish and proportions.
  • The Division accepted the Chinese design publication of 11 June 2008 as prior disclosure under Article 7 and found the informed user would perceive the compared toilet paper holders as creating the same overall impression.
  • Because the contested design lacked individual character under Article 6(1)(b), the invalidity application was upheld, the design was declared invalid, and costs were awarded against the holder.

Deciding panel

  • MemberAlvaro SESMA MERINO
  • MemberNatascha GALPERIN
  • MemberIvanka IVANOVA

Decision files

LanguageTypeSource link
enEnglish (en)machine translatedDownload original from EUIPO ↗
deGermanoriginalDownload original from EUIPO ↗

Locarno classes

23.02

Similar decisions

Ranked by shared Locarno class + shared legal grounds + matching outcome. Click a case to view full detail.

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
000132264

vs SHANDONG QIYUE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION TECHNOLOGY CO.,LTD

2026-05-26REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)238
000131884

vs Zhaoqing Mikasi Home Hardware Co., LTD

2026-03-27REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)238
000130601

vs Zhou Canbin

2026-01-15REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)238
000127275

vs GRZEGORZ PIĄTEK PHU "TOP SERVIS"

2025-09-17REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)238
000128177

vs DECATHLON

2025-08-11REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)238
000126775

vs Ecomsoul Pro SRL

2025-07-11REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)238
0001267152025-07-10REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)238
000128196

vs Rafał Sowa

2025-07-08REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)238